Page 114 - Anatomy-of-a-Fraud
P. 114

mind, a meeting among the major figures and their representatives
                                      might be appropriate. Such a meeting might decide on an
                                      independent audit of the certification documents of the
                                      individual polling stations by a non-Panamanian firm.
                                      Alternatively, the decision might be to hold a new election.
                                      Whatever solution the Panamanian decide on, the United States
                                      should be generous in making it possible, and in playing any
                                      neutral role that the participants might ask of it. If there is no
                                      generally accepted solution, then the United States should be
                                      careful not to endorse the election as having been a fully free
                                      exercise. It should continue to support the extension of
                                      Panamanian civil institutions, but it should be reluctant to
                                      strengthen further a military establishment that many,
                                      perhaps most, Panamanian consider to be primarily
                                      responsible for the inequities in the recent election”.



                             The observers quoted above not only acknowledge implicitly the fact of the
                     fraud (“fully free election”, “audit of  the certification documents”, “new election”,
                     etc.), but point –correctly– to the Defense Forces as being primarily responsible, in the
                     opinion of most Panamanians, of “the inequities in the recent election”. What a sharp
                     contrast  between  these  firm  and  strongly  held  views  and  the  accommodating
                     pronouncements of the official international observers!
                             On the other hand, the Venezuelan House of Representatives, in a resolution
                     passed on May 23, 1984, salutes “the general elections in Ecuador and El Salvador,
                     which culminated in the unimpeachable election of constitutional governments”, and
                     “regrets  the  attitude  of  Panamanian  electoral  authorities  that  casts  doubt  on  the
                     counting of the votes”. Again, a sharp contrast. An “unimpeachable election” when
                     referring  to  Ecuador  and  El  Salvador;  “doubts  on  the  counting  of  the  votes”  in
                     connection with Panama. Despite the diplomatic language customarily used in these
                     documents,  these  words  are  surprisingly  straight  forward.  There  is  no  question,
                     therefore, that Venezuelan congressmen were aware of many the fraudulent activities
                     we have exposed in this work.
                             The news services and the international magazines took it upon themselves to
                     reveal to the world at large the realities of the fraudulent electoral process in Panama.
                     Transcribed below are a few excerpts from international news media; many more could
                     also have been quoted:

                                       “Today, that reasonable doubt as to the integrity of the election to which we
                     alluded yesterday has turned into an absolute certainty of fraud for the opposition”.
                                                                     ABC, Madrid, May 11, 1984, page 31.
   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119